User talk:Grammar Cat
Welcome Hi, welcome to Nitrome Pixel Love Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the File:Flaming rat.png page. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- NOBODY (Talk) 17:16, June 16, 2012 I don't think you understand the reason I know you were the one who wrote the page. I asked NOBODY first because he was the one who decided that there needed to be rules upon Time K's feature. I was trying to have a discussion with him the last time, well, and it felt like he got defensive and decided to start banning pages at his own will. Also, the reason I suggested putting that banner on a template page is not because I think it's going to be frequently used. Transcluded templates look cleaner on articles in source mode and are more inviting to the editor to edit the article itself. If you ever need to use the template again, you can just type in the templates name surrounded by curly braces - saves you the trouble of having to look it up, then copy and paste it. Finally, if that template is used on multiple pages and you want to make a change to it (ex. a grammar error, which I know you're notorious for spotting) then all it takes is a change to that single template rather than having to spend time editing two, three or four hundred pages. - Random-storykeeper (YELL AT IT) 01:44, October 30, 2012 (UTC) Choice of words matter Recolouring a template is not "killing" it. "Killing" a template is turning the template into something that well, makes it not look like a template any more. The only thing I did was change around the colours, plus adjusting the text size so that the template looks more compact. I even provided you with an edit summary of why I changed the template colours: the links were just too hard to see. When you look at the template as it currently is now, all that stands out from a distance is the title and interactive objects section, where really, the links should be the ones with the emphasis. So you told me that I should just change the links. If only it were that easy. Changing the link colour of the template requires changing the colour of every link individually with tags. This causes a lot of code clutter, definitely not worth it for a user who tries to edit the template and yourself. As a workaround, the colour of the background must be edited instead of having to adjust the colour of every single link. Not a good idea in the long run. It is understandable that you feel territorial towards a template you created (I used to as well), but we also need to take into consideration that a wiki is free for users to edit, and that those who edit and change things around are doing it because they want to help this wiki. But when someone makes such edits and are told that what they are doing is "killing" the template and that "I'm going to swear at you" and on and on, well, it's hurtful to the user who receives the message. Even if you don't swear at me, the fact you truthfully want to is offensive enough. One last off-comment: - Random-storykeeper (YELL AT IT) 07:10, March 29, 2013 (UTC) Yeah, I took a while Sorry, though I think I did say I would reply to this, right? The colours weren't the only thing I changed. I also adjusted the font size and width so that there wouldn't be such a huge gap under the "interactive objects" section. The colours were probably the least of what I changed. I wanted to change the template so that the format would look cleaner, much like all the other formatted templates. The colours were a suggestion, and you are free to change them around with the colour parameters as much as you like. However, is most shocking is that because I changed the template to colours you didn't like, you completely undid all the changes I made to that template, including the format adjustments. That is what bothers me most. Please understand that completely changing the colours of a template is not a "mistake", whether I do it, or another user does it. It is all a subjective matter. I know it seems unnecessary, but I feel this message is kind of getting long, so I am going to put it into a spoiler template to reduce the initial length. And to answer your final question: do I hate you? Well, that might lead to the answer you would expect: I would say no. What reason do I have to hate you? Sure, you and I have worked alongside each other on the same wikis, disagreeing and arguing over little things here and there. You have taught me about working with others whose views may not always be the ones I disagree with. Sometimes yes, I might be annoyed by some of the things you have done in terms of editing, and I'm sure you could probably name some things of me, too. But that's no reason to despise any user, especially one like you. - Random-storykeeper (YELL AT IT) 02:09, April 6, 2013 (UTC) - Random-storykeeper (YELL AT IT) 02:09, April 6, 2013 (UTC) We'll see about that I'll readjust the template a bit and see what I can do. I don't want to make the images too small in templates, but at the same time, a large image stretches the template, and leaves lots of huge spaces where they shouldn't be. The text height should only be as high as the text itself can reach; it's what makes the templates look most presentable. You're always free to change the colours of it around once I do so, but without pressing the "undo" button, of course! Yes, I am a Christian. That verse rings a bell, though I also can't remember where it comes from. A doormat when it comes to my choice? Oh my. Well, when we disagree on something, it usually does lead to some sort of a compromise, which affects the both of us, 'Cat. And for a while, I did. All is part of the joy of learning to work with others. So I guess that means we are friends. And since you are still nice and young, you have plenty of gather all the experience you need to grow. :) - Random-storykeeper (YELL AT IT) 06:17, April 7, 2013 (UTC) Enabling show/hide Well, that's not too complicated. Thanks to the MediaWiki upgrade that occurred last year (I think), you don't actually need JavaScript to enable show/hide code. All you need to do is specify the class as "mw-collapsible mw-collapsed". Downside is, you can't customize the colours of the Expand/Collapse links. If you want a show/hide code, get TNY to paste the following in the wiki's Common.js: /*Show/hide*/ importScriptPage('ShowHide/code.js', 'dev'); The changes will take some time before they show (no pun intended), so if you don't see anything instantly, give it time. They should probably appear within a couple of hours, at most. If not, you could try clearing your browser's cache, but this has been known to delete game saves on certain browsers. - Random-storykeeper (YELL AT IT) 16:45, September 21, 2013 (UTC) :Aw, thank you. ^^ That means a lot, coming from a mass contributor like you. :) - Random-storykeeper (YELL AT IT) 06:24, September 22, 2013 (UTC) Fliptic articles Hi Grammar Cat, I would be willing to link to Fliptic Wiki articles that have content in them (ie. they aren't stubs), but not for pages without it. Some of the Fliptic games don't have articles about them on Fliptic Wiki like Dead End or Minibot, whereas those articles have pages and/or corresponding templates on Nitrome Pixel Love Wiki. The offwiki template implies that content was taken from another wiki and used on Nitrome Pixel Love Wiki. However, that would not be the case for every article. As an example, it makes no sense to credit Fliptic Wiki for the Abduction article when it has no body text and NPL Wiki's does. Adding the offwiki template to Running Warrior would be okay, since the article does have a lot of content in it, and the resemblances to each article's text are plausible. I would wait for Abduction, Dead End and Minibot to a) not be red links, and b) have content in them that would match what is on NPL Wiki before considering an offwiki template. I might keep the game templates I have already created at the moment, though. I'm not sure yet. 07:28, March 20, 2014 (UTC) RE: Thanks You're welcome and thank you for the compliment. :) You only need the game article at a minimum to be created/have content (like Running Warrior; it doesn't have to be complete but it should at least have some information) before adding the offwiki template. You don't need the component articles, in case you didn't know that already. 23:37, March 20, 2014 (UTC) RE: Improving productivity Hi Grammar Cat, long time no see. How have you been? The structure suggested is clearly outlined and I think that all the points are key points into constructing each Pixel Love game's pages. I actually put together a little to-do list on what I typically do when a Pixel Love game is featured. So far I can do enough to keep the wiki just up do date, but not so much as to fully expand on articles and even create the game components articles. I however would order the outline a bit differently. It is more practical to set the foundation for the articles first before adding detail. So instead of focusing on just the game article upon a PL game being featured, I would first create the game page and fill out the basic information, then update all the lists/main page etc. and finally create the game template, if needed. (I've come to the realisation that quite a few of these games do not require a games template, since the overall gameplay for some of these games is relatively short so all information can be put onto one article.) This way, if other users want to help contribute to a game's article, they can clearly see which pages would need to be created by looking at the game template. Additionally it seems that the outline wants a bunch of users to come together to create the articles and "gather the information". Of course, the Pixel Love Wiki doesn't have that many active contributors, and if anything, I would actually prefer it if users were spread out and focusing on different games to reduce edit conflicts and the like. I've realised I've had to change around the structure of some articles just a smidgen. For a number of games, levels can be quite short and their descriptions would fit maybe a few lines at most. Since this wiki is less active than Nitrome Wiki, I have experimented around with structure for the levels. Some games like Clockwork Cat have checkpoints, so I base level structure on the checkpoints. However the distance between each checkpoint is quite short, so I compiled each level into a numbered list due to length. Other games like Exposure I haven't worked out a walkthrough for since the orbs can be picked up in pretty much any order and such. I don't mind a video walkthrough for games like these but putting it into text is another manner... Anyways, the key thing is that it's good to be flexible sometimes, especially when it comes to Pixel Love games. The games come from all sorts of developers who structure their games differently, and as a result, making level 3 subsections for in-game levels doesn't always work, for example. Neither does having an article for every single component within a game, and I don't just mean endless / mini games. I guess what really would matter to me is the order of sections, for example, not the sections themselves. Like I don't mind if a Levels section uses a numbered list if that's more suitable, as long as it comes after the Gameplay section (or Controls if there is no Gameplay section.) I honestly don't think a basic structure alone improves productivity; it's when people actually sit down and do something about it that really makes things work. Productivity can be effective when users contribute to games that they enjoy, or so I would think. I'd like to help guide users with constructing good articles, but if I can't be around enough to set a good example then it's not worth trying to enforce a project at all. 08:49, August 9, 2015 (UTC) :Ha, I can relate. My family got a one month trial to shomi, and I've been using a lot of time to watch episodes of crime shows and anime. XD :Well yes of course only the user who knows the game inside and out can probably supply the most viable content to an article. I've been the one to merge all game articles onto just the game page, and as far as I can tell, it does work, especially for games that don't necessarily have defined levels. Examples I can think of off the top of my head are Bump and Space Odyssey. :I've been thinking of just focusing on maybe a few games at a time and then work out their game component articles etc. The games I had in mind that I want to focus on are Blym, Ripple Dot Zero and Egg Knight. Since there are a lot of Pixel Love games, most which don't have expanded articles, and I know you are quite the powerhouse editor, we could just focus on working within certain games at a time to reduce potential edit conflicts. Like I see you polishing up the Agent Turnright article and you seem to be moving towards Counter Terror. Are there any other games you see yourself focusing on for the wiki, or do you have a different agenda (like editing random stub articles or something). 07:03, August 10, 2015 (UTC)